THE PRESENTATION OF THE CROATIAN OPEN LOCAL BUDGET INDEX FOR EACH

Transcription

1 THE PRESENTATION OF THE CROATIAN OPEN LOCAL BUDGET INDEX FOR EACH CITY The main purpose of this section is to give a closer insight into the disclosure of local budget information and openness to the public for each city. Therefore, for each city a short analysis has been written based on our Questionnaire (see Annex A) and the recommendations for the local budget transparency improvement. The report for each city consists of three paragraphs and two tables: The first paragraph gives analysis of results according to the Main COLBI, where we comment on the existence of local budget documents, together with quality of information presented within. The second paragraph gives analysis of results according to the Additional COLBI e.g. comments on availability of various documents on the web page (budget documents, local gazette, Statute of the city, City Council Rules of Procedure, etc.). The third paragraph interprets city s rank according to the Total COLBI and concretely suggests how to improve the local budget transparency in each city. Table 1 provides information on public availability of the most important local budget documents with document s original names and location links (in case they were web-published). As most of websites are often updated or redesigned, the date when these links were last checked has been given. Table 2 is our Questionnaire containing the responses for each city. 1

2 The Institute of Public Finance, Zagreb in collaboration with the CBPDP-IBPD, Washington has assessed budget transparency in 33 Croatian cities. More information on this project can be found at This report contains the results for UMAG Population: 12,900 Main COLBI: 1 52 / rank 22 Additional COLBI: 82 / rank 20 Total COLBI: 61 / rank 22 *Availability of local budget information Main COLBI = 52 (rank 22). As the Budget Proposal Documents have not been available on the website, nor have the LEXE submitted them to us, we have used Adopted Budget Documents. The budget proposal documents lack, among other things, the functional classification of expenditures, and budget items are only presented up to level 3 of the Chart of Accounts, so that no deeper insight is provided into all tax revenues and grants. Also missing are macroeconomic forecasts underlying the budget figures, the descriptions and explanations of various kinds of revenues and expenditures and the information on the city s outstanding debt. *A local unit's openness to the public Additional COLBI = 82 (rank 20). The official website offers the city's Statute, the City Council's Rules of Procedure, the contacts of the city's administrative bodies, City Council members and of the information officer, as well as the official gazette archives (for the period ). The link 'proračun' provides only some of the budget documents for 2010 and 2009, whereas the Half-Year Report for 2009 and the Year-End Report for 2008 can be found in the official gazette. Citizens are allowed to attend the City Council meeting, as the meeting agendas and materials are publicly available in a timely manner. *Total budget transparency Total COLBI = 61 (rank 22). Budget transparency could be improved by presenting the budget items in the Adopted Budget up to level 4 of the Chart of Accounts, introducing the functional classification of expenditures into the budget proposal documents, as well as in Half-Year and Year-End Report. It would be good if all the important budget documents relating to the previous period of at least three years would be available at one link. Umag could have attained a better score had both members of the City Council responded to the Survey. 1 A maximum value of each COLBI is

3 Table 1. Document availability Type of Document Budget Proposal Documents (BPDD) Adopted Budget (AB) Adopted Projections (AP) Adopted Decision on Budget Execution (ADBE) Half-Year Report (HYR) Year-End Report (YR) Document produced? Not known Title of the document; Date of issue; Internet link* Not available Citizens Budget (CB) No Not available *Internet links checked on 16/06/2010 Proračun Grada Umaga za razdoblje godine; 23/12/09; IPN1: IPN2: bene_novine_grada_umaga_15_09.pdf Proračun Grada Umaga za razdoblje godine; 23/12/09; Odluka o izvršavanju Proračuna Grada Umaga za godinu 23/12/09; bene_novine_grada_umaga_15_09.pdf Polugodišnji izvještaj o izvršenju proračuna Grada umaga za godinu; 18/08/09; bene_novine_grada_umaga_09_09.pdf Godišnji obračun proračuna Grada Umaga za godinu; 31/03/09; bene_novine_grada_umaga_03_09.pdfđ Table 2. Questions and responses for the City of Umag Questions 1 to 12: Proposed and adopted budget documents and RBY=2010 Q1. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY classified by economic classification? : p. 3-4 Q2. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY by functional classification? Q3. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY for individual programs? : p Q4. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present tax revenues from different sources for RBY? : p. 2 Q5. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present grants for RBY? : p. 2 Q6. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present non-tax revenues from different sources for RBY? : p. 2-3 Q7. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present information on outstanding debt? : p. 4, 14, 15, 51 Comment: Information on principal repayment in BY is present Q8. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present information on payments of interest on debt for the RBY? : p. 3, 14, 51 Q9. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents contain macroeconomic forecasts upon which the budget figures are based? 3

4 Do the proposed and adopted budget documents contain verbal descriptions (explanations) of various expenditures for Q10. the RBY? Q11. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents contain verbal descriptions (explanations) of various revenues for the Do the proposed and adopted budget documents contain verbal descriptions (explanations) of individual programs and Q12. the underlying expenditures? Citation: AB2: p Questions 13 to 15: Proposed and adopted budget documents and RBY-1=2009 Q13. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY-1 classified by economic classification? Q14. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY-1 classified by functional classification? Q15. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY-1 for individual programs? Questions 16 to 19: Proposed and adopted budget documents and RBY+1=2011 / RBY+2=2012 Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present tax and non-tax revenues from different sources for RBY+1 and Q16. RBY+2? : p. 2-3 Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY+1 and RBY+2, classified by economic Q17. classification? : p. 3-4 Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY+1 and RBY+2, classified by functional Q18. classification? Q19. Do the proposed and adopted budget documents present expenditures for RBY+1 and RBY+2 for individual programs? : p Question 20: Citizens Budget Q20. Does the local government publish a non-technical presentation of the budget intended for a wide audience (Citizens Budget)? Citation: Not available Questions 21 to 25: Half-Year Report Q21. Does the Half-Year Report present expenditures for RBY-1, classified by economic classification? Citation: HYR: p Q22. Does the Half-Year Report present expenditures for RBY-1, classified by functional classification? Citation: HYR Q23. Does the Half-Year Report present tax revenues from different sources for RBY-1? Citation: HYR: p Q24. Does the Half-Year Report present grants for RBY-1? Citation: HYR: p. 56 Q25. Does the Half-Year Report present non-tax revenues from different sources for RBY-1? Citation: HYR: p

5 Questions 26 to 32: Year-End Report Q26. Does the Year-End Report present expenditures for RBY-2, classified by economic classification? Citation: YR: p. 4-6 Q27. Does the Year-End Report present expenditures for RBY-2, classified by functional classification? Citation: YR Q28. Does the Year-End Report present expenditures for RBY-2 for individual programs? Citation: YR: p Q29. Does the Year-End Report present tax revenues from different sources for RBY-2? Citation: YR: p. 2 Q30. Does the Year-End Report present grants for RBY-2? Citation: YR: p. 2 Q31. Does the Year-End Report present non-tax revenues from different sources for RBY-2? Citation: YR: p. 2-4 Q32. Does the Year-End Report present information on outstanding debt? Citation: YR: p. 6, 34, 59 Questions 33 to 37: Availability of Budget Proposal with Projections and local gazette Q33. Were Budget Proposal Documents available? Response: Not known Citation: Not available Q34. Are the information on RBY+1/RBY+2 presented in Budget Proposal Documents? Response: Not known Citation: Not available What is the time period between receiving the Budget Proposal Documents by local unit representatives and its Q35. enactment? Response: 9 days Citation: Survey Q36. Is the local official gazette available on the Internet? Response: Citation: Q37. What is the time period between enacting the budget and its publication in the local gazette? Response: 1 day Citation: Questionnaire Questions 38 to 41: Cooperation with local officials and representatives Q38. Has the city s information officer responded to the Survey? Response: Citation: Survey Q39. Have the two City Council representatives and head of the city s Finance Department responded to the Survey? Response: Only one of them has responded Citation: Survey If some additional contact information has been requested from local governments, how many days have passed from Q40. request to response? Response: 0 days Citation: Address book If some additional contact information has been requested from local governments, how many telephone calls or Q41. messages have been needed to obtain the data? Response: 1 (1 ) Citation: Address book 5

6 Questions 42 to 43: Information about local representatives Q42. Is the list of representatives in the City Council available on the city s official website? Response: Citation: Is the information on the political party membership of representatives in the City Council available on the city s official Q43. website? Response: Citation: Questions 44 to 45: Information about local Committee on Budget Issues Q44. Does the local Committee on Budget Issues (as a part of the local City Council) exist? Response: No Citation: Address book Q45. Are the names of members of the local Committee on Budget Issues available on the city s official website? Response: No committee Citation: Address book Questions 46 to 47: Availability of the main city documents Q46. Are the City Council s Rules of Procedure available on the city's official website? Response: Citation: Q47. Is the Statute of the city available on the city's official website? Response: Citation: Questions 48 to 52: City Council meetings documents and participation Are the agendas of the City Council meetings made available on the city's official website prior to the City Council Q48. meetings? Response: Citation: Is the distribution of documents to city representatives prior to the City Council meetings stipulated by the City Council s Q49. Rules of Procedure or by the Statute of the city? Response: Citation: Poslovnik GVG Umaga članak 90 Do the City Council s Rules of Procedure stipulate that, prior to meetings, the documents should be made available on the Q50. city's official website or distributed to parties other than the City Council representatives? Response: Citation: Poslovnik GVG Umaga čl. 120 Q51. Are citizens allowed to attend the City Council meetings? Response: Citation: Poslovnik GVG Umaga čl. 118 i 119 Is the right of the City Council representatives to ask questions at the City Council meetings stipulated by the City Q52. Council s Rules of Procedure or by the Statute of the city? Response: Citation: Poslovnik GVG Umaga čl. 84 i 85 6